모든 템플릿

Academic Integrity in the Age of AI

A research survey examining how AI tools are reshaping academic integrity norms among college and university students. Covers policy awareness, personal usage patterns, acceptability perceptions, peer behavior observations, and policy recommendations.

샘플 질문

템플릿에 포함된 내용을 미리 확인해 보세요. 모든 질문은 설문 공개 전에 자유롭게 수정할 수 있습니다.

질문 32개 · 약 13분
Q01
객관식

Are you currently enrolled as a student at a college or university?

  • Yes
  • No
Q02
메시지

Welcome to this study on student experiences with AI tools in academic settings. This survey is conducted for research purposes only. Your responses are completely anonymous and will be reported only in aggregate — no individual can be identified. There are no right or wrong answers; we are interested in your honest opinions and experiences. Participation is voluntary, and you may stop at any time without consequence. The survey takes approximately 10-12 minutes to complete. By continuing, you consent to participate in this study.

Q03
드롭다운

What is your current academic level?

  • First-year undergraduate
  • Second-year undergraduate
  • Third-year undergraduate
  • Fourth-year (or more) undergraduate
  • Master's student
  • Doctoral / PhD student
  • Professional degree student (e.g., JD, MD, MBA)
  • Other
Q04
객관식

To your knowledge, does your college or university have a formal policy on the use of AI tools (e.g., ChatGPT, Copilot) in academic work?

  • Yes, there is a formal policy
  • There may be informal guidelines, but no formal policy
  • No, there is no policy
  • I'm not sure
Q05
메시지

The next few questions ask about your own experiences using AI tools for academic work. Remember, your responses are completely anonymous — we are interested in understanding real student practices, not making judgments.

Q06
메시지

Students use AI in many different ways, and opinions vary widely on what is acceptable. The following scenarios describe different ways a student might use AI tools. For each one, please rate how acceptable you believe it is. Note: These scenarios may appear in a randomized order.

Q07
AI 인터뷰

Thinking about the scenarios you just rated, can you describe a specific situation where you felt unsure whether using an AI tool was acceptable or not? What made it feel like a gray area?

Q08
메시지

The next questions ask about what you have observed among other students at your institution. These are not about your own behavior — just your general impressions.

Q09
메시지

Finally, we would like your input on how institutions should approach AI tools in academic settings.

Q10
장문형

Based on your responses throughout this survey, is there anything else you would like to share about AI tools and academic integrity — including experiences, concerns, or suggestions we may not have asked about?

Q11
드롭다운

What is your primary field of study?

  • Arts & Humanities
  • Social Sciences
  • Business & Economics
  • Natural Sciences
  • Engineering
  • Computer Science & Information Technology
  • Health Sciences & Medicine
  • Education
  • Law
  • Mathematics & Statistics
  • Other (please specify)
Q12
객관식

Which of the following AI tools have you used at least once, for any purpose — academic or personal? (Select all that apply)

  • ChatGPT (OpenAI)
  • Microsoft Copilot / Bing Chat
  • Google Gemini (formerly Bard)
  • Claude (Anthropic)
  • Grammarly AI features
  • AI-powered paraphrasing tools (e.g., QuillBot)
  • GitHub Copilot or other AI coding assistants
  • AI image generators (e.g., DALL-E, Midjourney)
  • Other AI tool not listed
  • I have not used any AI tools
Q13
의견 척도

How well do you feel you understand the rules or guidelines at your institution regarding AI use in academic work?

척도: 15
최소:Not at all well최대:Extremely well
Q14
객관식

During the current academic term, how often have you used AI tools (e.g., ChatGPT, Copilot, Grammarly AI, AI paraphrasing tools) to assist with any academic work?

  • Never
  • Once or twice
  • A few times a month
  • A few times a week
  • Daily or almost daily
Q15
의견 척도

Using an AI tool to brainstorm or generate ideas for an essay topic

척도: 17
최소:Completely unacceptable최대:Completely acceptable
Q16
의견 척도

In your estimation, how common is it for students at your institution to use AI tools for academic work?

척도: 15
최소:Not at all common최대:Extremely common
Q17
객관식

Which of the following best describes the approach you think colleges and universities should take regarding AI tools in academic work?

  • Ban AI tool use entirely in academic work
  • Allow AI only for specific low-stakes tasks (e.g., brainstorming, grammar checking)
  • Allow AI use broadly but require students to disclose it
  • Allow AI use broadly with no disclosure requirement
  • Let individual instructors decide for their own courses
  • Other (please specify)
Q18
드롭다운

What is your age?

  • 18-20
  • 21-23
  • 24-26
  • 27-30
  • 31-35
  • 36-40
  • 41 or older
  • Prefer not to say
Q19
의견 척도

Across your courses this term, how consistent have your instructors been in communicating their expectations about AI tool use?

척도: 15
최소:Very inconsistent최대:Very consistent
Q20
객관식

For which of the following academic tasks have you used AI tools? (Select all that apply)

  • Brainstorming or generating ideas
  • Researching or finding sources
  • Summarizing readings or articles
  • Writing or drafting text
  • Editing, grammar, or proofreading
  • Solving math or science problems
  • Writing or debugging code
  • Creating presentations or visual materials
  • Studying or preparing for exams
  • Translating text between languages
  • Other (please specify)
  • I have not used AI tools for academic tasks
Q21
의견 척도

Using an AI tool to check grammar and improve sentence structure in a paper you wrote yourself

척도: 17
최소:Completely unacceptable최대:Completely acceptable
Q22
의견 척도

In your estimation, how common is it for students at your institution to submit AI-generated work without disclosing the use of AI to their instructor?

척도: 15
최소:Not at all common최대:Extremely common
Q23
의견 척도

How important do you think it is for an AI academic integrity policy to include clear definitions of what AI use is and is not permitted?

척도: 15
최소:Not at all important최대:Extremely important
Q24
객관식

Which best describes the institution where you are currently enrolled?

  • Public university
  • Private university
  • Community college
  • Liberal arts college
  • Online-only institution
  • Other (please specify)
Q25
의견 척도

When you use AI tools for academic work, how often do you mention or disclose this use to your instructor?

척도: 15
최소:Never최대:Always
Q26
의견 척도

Using an AI tool to summarize assigned readings instead of reading them in full

척도: 17
최소:Completely unacceptable최대:Completely acceptable
Q27
의견 척도

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement: Most students at my institution do not consider using AI tools for academic work to be a form of cheating.

척도: 17
최소:Strongly disagree최대:Strongly agree
Q28
의견 척도

How important is it to you that students are involved in developing their institution's AI use policies?

척도: 15
최소:Not at all important최대:Extremely important
Q29
의견 척도

Using an AI tool to generate a first draft of a written assignment that you then edit and submit

척도: 17
최소:Completely unacceptable최대:Completely acceptable
Q30
의견 척도

Using an AI tool to generate code for a programming assignment

척도: 17
최소:Completely unacceptable최대:Completely acceptable
Q31
의견 척도

Using an AI tool to produce answers for a take-home exam or graded quiz

척도: 17
최소:Completely unacceptable최대:Completely acceptable
Q32
의견 척도

Submitting AI-generated text as entirely your own work without any editing or disclosure

척도: 17
최소:Completely unacceptable최대:Completely acceptable

포함된 기능

  • AI 후속 질문

    정형화된 설문이 놓치는 세부 내용을, 주관식 답변에 맞춰 AI가 심층 질문으로 끌어냅니다.

  • 주의력 확인 장치

    성의 없는 답변과 저품질 응답자를 걸러내는 내장 안전장치입니다.

  • AI가 작성한 문안

    문구, 질문 순서, 분기 로직까지 AI가 연구 목표에 맞춰 작성합니다.

  • 자동 리포트

    응답이 모이면 주요 주제, 인용문, 이해하기 쉬운 요약이 자동으로 작성됩니다.

다른 서비스와 비교

다른 설문 도구의 가장 유사한 템플릿을 검토했습니다. 그 도구들이 잘하는 점과, 이 템플릿이 한발 더 나아가는 지점을 정리했습니다.

이 템플릿을 선택하는 이유

  • Includes an AI follow-up interview question that lets students describe a specific real scenario in their own words, going beyond fixed-choice ratings
  • Pairs opinion-scale acceptability ratings across 7 distinct AI-use scenarios (brainstorming, grammar checking, summarizing, drafting, coding, exam answers, submitting AI text as one's own) so nuance in norms isn't lost
  • Combines policy-awareness, personal-usage, peer-observation, and policy-recommendation sections with transitional chat messages that frame each part of the study for respondents
  • Automated per-response quality scoring and an auto-generated report mean open-ended disclosure and recommendation questions can be analyzed without manual coding

Jotform

Academic Integrity Form Template

This is a static, fielding-ready form template rather than a research instrument, likely oriented toward reporting or acknowledging integrity policies rather than studying attitudes and usage patterns. It's easy to deploy and customize with Jotform's drag-and-drop builder, but it isn't designed to probe nuanced student perceptions or behaviors. No mention of adaptive questioning or AI-assisted follow-up.

잘하는 점

  • Quick to deploy using Jotform's established form builder
  • Likely offers simple customization of fields and branding
  • Familiar, widely-used form platform for institutions

아쉬운 점

  • Static question set with no adaptive follow-up probing on individual responses
  • No voice AI interview option for richer qualitative capture
  • No automated per-response quality scoring or auto-generated analysis report

Typeform

Academic Research Form Template

A generic academic research form template rather than one purpose-built around AI and academic integrity themes, so a researcher would need to substantially rewrite questions to cover policy awareness, usage, and peer-behavior topics. Typeform's conversational one-question-at-a-time format is pleasant for respondents, but the template itself is a generic starting point, not a subject-matter-specific instrument. No adaptive AI interviewing is indicated.

잘하는 점

  • Clean, conversational one-question-at-a-time UI known for good completion rates
  • Flexible logic branching for skip patterns
  • Easy to customize question wording and answer types

아쉬운 점

  • Generic template requires manual rebuilding of academic-integrity-specific content (policy awareness, acceptability ladder, peer observation)
  • No adaptive AI follow-up interview or voice AI interview capability
  • No automated per-response quality scoring or auto-generated report

설문을 공개할 준비가 되셨나요?

이 템플릿을 편집기에서 열어 보세요. 첫 응답자가 보기 전에 모든 부분을 원하는 대로 바꿀 수 있습니다.